Cultural Resource Specialist · Services Sacramento, Ca 95826 ElectricTel: 916-386-5436 cell: 916-201-8571 CompanyEmail: [email protected] July 15, 2008 Larry Meyers, Executive Secretary

"SC)

Pacific Gas M. Trumbly Mailing Addressand Cultural Resources Specialist 5655 Florin Perkins, Room 137

ElcrcEnvironmental Services Sacramento, Ca 95826ElectricTel: 916-386-5436 cell: 916-201-8571

CompanyEmail: [email protected]

July 15, 2008

Larry Meyers, Executive SecretaryNative American Heritage Commission915 Capitol Mall, Room 364Sacramento, Ca 95814(916) 657-5390 - FAX

RE: Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP)License Renewal Feasibility Study

Dear Mr. Meyers:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is conducting a License Renewal Feasibility Study to

determine if it is feasible to renewal the Diablo Canyon Power Plant operating licenses. The purpose ofthis letter is to request a search of the NAHC's sacred lands file and a list of local Native Americanswith an interest in this area. Any information you can provide for this project area would be helpful.

The current operating licenses expire in 2024 and 2025 for Units 1 and 2, respectively. If PG&Edecides to pursue license renewal, based on the results of this feasibility study, the operating licensewould extend for an additional 20 years to 2044 and 2045. The decision to pursue license renewal hasnot yet been made.

As part of the license renewal process, NRC requires potential applicants to "assess whether anyhistoric or archaeological properties will be affected by the proposed project." NRC may also requestan informal consultation with your office at a later date under Section 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 USC 470), and under Federal Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation regulations (36 CFR 800). By contacting you during the feasibility study, we hope toidentify any issues that need to be addressed or provide any information your office may need toexpedite the potential NRC consultation.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) is located within the PG&E owner-controlled area, which consistsof approximately 760 acres of land located in San Luis Obispo County, adjacent to the Pacific Oceanand roughly equidistant from San Francisco and Los Angeles. It is located directly southeast ofMontana de Oro State Park and is approximately 12 miles southwest of the city of San Luis Obispo, thecounty seat and the nearest significant population center (Figure 1). The DCPP is located on the PortSan Luis, Ca 7.5' USGS Quadrangle in the unsectioned area of Canada De Los Osos Y Pecho Y IslayLand Grant in Township 31 South, Range 10 East.

Three transmission lines connect the power plant to the regional grid, and are thus relevant to theLicense Renewal Feasibility Study (Figure 3.1-2). They include:

* Diablo-Mesa - One double-circuit line was connected to an existing Morro Bay-Mesa line10.25 miles from DCPP with an 80-ft. right-of-way width.• Diablo-Gates - One single-circuit line was connected to the Gates Substation in Fresno County

79 miles northeast of DCPP with a 350-ft. right-of-way width.* Diablo Midway #2 and 3 - Two single-circuit lines were connected to the Midway Substation in

Kern County 84 miles southeast of DCPP with a combined right-of-way width of 400 ft.

In total, there are approximately 170 miles of corridor that occupy approximately 4,500 acres. Thecorridors pass primarily through foothills sand rolling land. In addition, there are parcels of land thatare agricultural and forest land. In addition to an overview map (Figure 2.1), a table has been createdproviding location data for each transmission line (Figure 3).

PG&E does not expect continued DCPP operations to adversely affect cultural resources in the APE, asPG&E has no plans to alter current operations or disturb any land for the proposed project. Noconstruction along any of the transmission lines is planned. Maintenance on the transmission lineswould continue as currently performed.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this project please feel free to call me (916) 201-8571.After your review, we would appreciate your input detailing any concerns you may have about culturalresources in the current APE.

Thank you for taking the time to review this project.

Best Regards,

Maggie TrumblyCultural Resource SpecialistEnclosure (2 Maps and a Table)

APPENDIX BENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

SUrban Aim.a

0Environmental ReportDiablo Canyon Power Plant

Figure 2.1-250-Mile Vicinity Map

3 Mlt

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Page B-3License Renewal Application

APPENDIX BENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

SAN NEF~iiARtM~O

1%

Trans*nlsslan Uses

Imin~23OkVII5(reamsl

* M~ ~

Environmental ReportDiablo Canyon Power Plant

Figure 3.1-2Transmission Lines

:*w

Diablo Canyon Power PlantLicense Renewal Application

Page B-4

FIGURE 3: TRANSMISSION LINE LOCATIONAL DATA

Transmission Line County(ies) USGS 7.5' Quadrangle Township and RangeDiablo to Mesa San Luis Obispo County Port San Luis and Morro Bay South T31S R10E; T31S R11lE; and T30S RilE

Diablo To Gates San Luis Obispo, Port San Luis, Morro Bay South, Morro T20S R17E; T21S Rl7E; T22S, R17E;Monterey, Kings and Bay North, Atascadero, Templeton, T22S R1 6E; T23S R1 6E; T23S Ri 5E;Fresno Counties Estrella, Shanodon, Cholame Hills, T24S R15SE; T24S R14E; T25S R14E;

Cholame Valley, The Dark Hole, Garza T25S R13E; T26S R13E; T27S Ri2E;Peak, Avenal, and Guijarral Hills T285 R12E; T28S Ri11E; T29S Ri lE;

T30S RilE; T31S RilE; T31S Ri0EDiablo to Midway San Luis Obispo and Port San Luis, Pismo Beach, Arroyo T295 R23E; T29S R22E; T30S R22E;

Kern Counties Grande NE, Tar Springs Ridge, Cadwell T29S R2iE; T30S R2iE; T30S R20E;Mesa, Los Machos Hills, Branch T31S R20E; T31S Ri9E; T3iS R18E;Mountain, Chimineas Ranch, Simmler, T31S R17E; T3iS Ri6E; T32S RiSE;McKittrick Summit, Reward, Bell Ridge, T32S Ri4E; T32S Ri3E; T31S R12E;West Elk Hills, Lokern, and Buttonwillow T3iS Ri1lE; T31S Ri0E

iE 07/18/2008 14:49 .FAX 916 607 5390u-l

NAHC NAHC l~Io01

Ama~Id SohwnIzenAaa~r. fJov~mar

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION915 CAPITOL MALL ROOM 364SACR~AMENTO, CA 96814(916) 653-4082(916) 67-75590 - Fax

@July 18, 2008

Maggie TrumblyPacific Gas and Eieotii Company5565 Florin Perkins, Room 137Sacramnento, CA 95826

Sent by Fax: 916-386-5425Number of Pages: 3

RE: Proposed Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) Ucense Renewal Feasibility Study; San Luis

Obispo County.

Dear Ms. Trumbly:

A record search of the Sacred Landfs Fife indicates the presence of Native American cultural

resources that may be impacted by one of your project. See information below."

Site Name County Quad. T R Seo Site No. Contact

Port San Luls San Luis Port San 316 11E 23 Bertha Bilsbee

Obispe Luis Indian Center of SantaBarbara,808 E. Cots St.Santa Barbara 931 01

__________ ____805-.903-8968

Sunset Palisades As Above Pismo 'CA-SLO- Mark Vigil

Beach 801 SLOCOC1 030 Ritchie RoadGrover Beach 93433

_____805-401-2461

Avila Beach Tank As Above As Above As above

_Farm ______ _______

Point Buchon As Above Morro Bay, As' above

South

Fuel'Storage As Above Morro Bay '"CA-SLO-1e PIa-tti Dunton,

Tank Farm, North 377 FairviewMorro Bay 93442

_____________ ________ ___ _____805-402-0893

House Floor As Above As Above CA-SLO- As• Above

_______________ _________ ____ 239_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _

"Toro Creek As Above As Above 285 liE R. Gibson

1-eadwaters P.O. Box 102

Cemetery _________Paso Robles 93446

07/18/2000 14:49 FAX 916 057 5300NAH NAHC l•i002

The presence or absence of specific site information in the Sacred Lands File does not indicatethe absence of other cultural resources In any project area, Other sources of information regardingcultural resources in your project area should also be contacted for Information regarding known andreporded sites. I suggest you consult with all of those on the accompanying Native American Contactslist, if they Cennot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge aboutoultural resources in your project area. If a response has not been received within two weeks ofnotificatlon, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call to ensure that the projectinformation has been received.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from any these individualsor groups, please notify me, With your assistance we are able to assure that our lists contain currentinformation. It you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (916) 653-404g,

Sincerely,

Katy SanchezProgram Analyst

07/18/2008 14:49 FAX 916 657 5290NAC102 NA]•C . •oo8

Native American ContactsSan Luis Obispo County

July 18, 2008

Santa Ynez Band of Mission IndiansVincent Armenta, ChairpersonP.O. Box 517. ChumasliSanta Ynez ,CA '93460vamrienta@santaynezohumash~org(805) 688-7997(805) 686-9578 Fax

Pullulaw Khus2001 San Bernardo CreekMorro Bay ,CA 93442

Julie Lynn Tumarnait365 North Poli AveOjai ,GA [email protected](805) 646-6214

Lel Lynn Odom1339 24th StreetOceano ,CA 93445(805) 489-5390

Churnash

Chumashn

Chumash

San Luis Obispo County Chumash CouncilChief Mark Steven Vigil1030 Ritchie Road ChumashGrover Beach , CA 93433cheifmvigil @fix.net(805) 481-2461(805) 474-4729 -Fax

SaJ[nan Tribe of Monterey, San Luis Obispo and San Bonit0 C~untiasJohn W. Burch, Traditional Chairperson8315 Morro Rd, #202 SalinanAtascadero ,CA [email protected] 235-2730 Cell .805-460-9204

Santa Ynez Tribal Elders CouncilAdelina Alva-Padilla, Chair WomsnP.O. Box 365 ChumashSanta Ynez ,CA [email protected](805) 688-6446(805) 693-1768 FAX

Mona Olivas Tucker650 Camino Del ReyArroyo Grande, CA 93420(805) 489-1052 Home(805) 746-2121 Cell

Chumash

This list Is currenqt only as of the date at this document.LDletilbutlon of this i/st does not relieve any person of Ste IttOiy roSponsle•lllty as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health end/Safety Codes ,.Sertloo~~oo on 5097.94 of the Public Resoutr-es Cede and .SectiOn 509-7.9Bato the Public Ace'ourow Oodc.

This list Is only epplicable for oontscllng local Native Americans with regard to c;ultural resources for the proposedOlablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) License Renlewal Feas~blbtly Study, San Jauls Obispo County/.

07/18/2000 14:49 FAX 916 857 5390 NH 0NAHC 0O4

Native American ContactsSan Luls Obispo County

July 18, 2008

Matthew Darien Goldman680 Camino Del Rey ChumashArroyo Grande, CA 93420(805) 550-0461 Home

Santa Ynez Band of Mission IndiansSam Cohen, Tribal Administrator..P.O. Box 517 ChumashSanta Ynez , CA 93460(805) 688-7997(805) 686-9578 Fax

Salinan-Chumash NationXIelolixii3901 Q Street, Suite 31 B SalinanBakersfield ,CA 93301 Chumashxielolixii @yahoo.corn661-864-1295408-966-8807 - cell

Northern Churnash Tribal CouncilFred Collins, Spokesperson.1177 Marsh Street, Suite 110 ChumashSan Luis Obispo ,CA 93401(805) 801-0347 (Cell)

This lit Is current only 58 of the date of this document,

Distribution of this list does rnot relieve eny persorn of sttutory repornsibility es dtefined In Section 7060.5 of the Health andSalety Code, Setion 5007.94 of file Public Renourcee Code end $•ectlon 500?978 of the Public RasOmroea Code.

Ttle UiSt Is; only applifcabls for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the prop~o-S-dDlablo Canyon Power Plenit(DCPP) License Renewal Feasibility Studyt Sarn Lols Oblspo County.

Pacific Gas M. Trumbly Mailing Addressand Cultural Resources Specialist 5555 Florinl Perkins, Room 137

ElcrcEnvironmental Services Sacramento, Ca 95826ElectricTel: 916-386-5436 cell: 916-201-8571

Company Fax:: 916-386-5425CompanyEmail: [email protected]

May 22, 2009

Santa Ynez Band of Mission IndiansVincent Armenta, ChairpersonPO Box 517Santa Ynez, Ca 93460


Dear Mr. Armenta:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is conducting a License Renewal Feasibility Study todetermine if it is feasible to renewal the Diablo Canyon Power Plant operating licenses. The purpose ofthis letter is to request information or comments that you might have regarding cultural resourceswithin the current study area.


As part of the license renewal process, NRC requires potential applicants to "assess whether anyhistoric or archaeological properties will be affected by the proposed project." NRC may also requestan informal consultation with you at a later date under Section 106 of the National HistoricPreservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 USC 470), and under Federal Advisory Council on HistoricPreservation regulations (36 CFR 800). By contacting you during the feasibility study, we hope toidentify any issues that need to be addressed or provide any information that you may need to expeditethe potential NRC consultation.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) is located within the PG&E owner-controlled area, which consistsof approximately 760 acres of land located in San Luis Obispo County, adjacent to the Pacific Oceanand roughly equidistant from San Francisco and Los Angeles. It is located directly southeast ofMontana de Oro State Park and is approximately 12 miles southwest of the city of San Luis Obispo, thecounty seat and the nearest significant population center (Figure 1). The DCPP is located on the PortSan Luis, Ca 7.5' USGS Quadrangle in the unsectioned area of Canada De Los Osos Y Pecho Y IslayLand Grant in Township 31 South, Range 10 East.

Three transmission lines connect the power plant to the regional grid, and are thus relevant to theLicense Renewal Feasibility Study (see attached Figure 3.1-2). They include:

* Diablo-Mesa - One double-circuit line was connected to an existing Morro Bay-Mesa line10.25 miles from DCPP with an 80-ft. right-of-way width.

* Diablo-Gates - One single-circuit line was connected to the Gates Substation in Fresno County79 miles northeast of DCPP with a 350-ft. right-of-way width.

* Diablo Midway #2 and 3 - Two single-circuit lines were connected to the Midway Substation inKern County 84 miles southeast of DCPP with a combined right-of-way width of 400 ft.

In total, there are approximately 170 miles of corridor that occupy approximately 4,500 acres. Thecorridors pass primarily through foothills sand rolling land. In addition, there are parcels of land that isagricultural and forest land. In addition to an overview map (Figure 2) a table has been createdproviding location data for each transmission line (Figure3).

PG&E does not expect continiued DCPP operations to adversely affect cultural resources in this studyarea, as PG&E has no plans to alter current operations or disturb any land for the proposed project. Noconstruction along any of the transmission lines is planned. Maintenance on the transmission lineswould continue as currently performed.

PG&E is aware that there are many. cultural resources adjacent to and near the DCPP main area ofoperations. A Cultural Resources Management Plan was developed in the 1980's for CA-SLO-2. Thismanagement plan is still in place and being followed to date. On adjacent lands that PG&E owns aprotocol for reviewing ranching operation on a regular basis to help avoid adverse impacts culturalresources.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this project please feel free to call me (916) 201-8571.After your review, we would appreciate your input detailing any concerns you may have about culturalresources in the current study area.


Best Regards,

Maggie TrumblyCultural Resource SpecialistEnclosure (2 Maps and a Table)

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION4201 WILSON ,BOULEVARD

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22.230

September 18, 2012 - H------

Milford Wayne Donaldson 21 IStat'e Historic Preservation Officer , P] ! 0 iN

office. of Historic Preservation1725 23rd Street, Suite 1O0 0 OHPSacramento, CA 95816 *.....

Re: Central Coastal California Seismic Imaging:Project

Dear Mr. Donaldson,

;The ;National Science Foundation. (NSF) is initiating consultation with the State Historic preservationofficer (SHPO) regarding the undertaking referenced :above. We are consulting with you in accordancewith 36 CFR Part 800, the regulations implementing Section 106 of the ;National Historic PreserVationAct. Specifically, we .are consulting With you concerning the determination of the Project's area ofpotential effect (APE), the adequacy of the inventory effort and finding of effect for the proposedundertaking;

Enclosed you will find the following materials in support of our present consultation effort:1. Attachment 1: Project Description2. Attachment 2: Cultural ResOurces inventory Report (Howes, Haydu and Price,2012)

a. Vidinity, Location and APE maps (Figures 1,3, 4, 5 and 6);b. Native American consultation documents (Appendix A);cO. Cultural Resource LocationMaps (Appendix B); andd. Site .Records (Appendix C).

The NSF, in cooperation with Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), proposes to coniduct :seismicimaging :studies in the vicinity of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) and :known offshore fault.zones. The Project would be, conducted along the central coast of California, from just north of Cayncosdown to San Luis Bay,. in :San 'Luis Obispo County (Figure I of Attachment 2). The prop~osed Projectwould encompass a largeo ffshore area (1,0'175 kilometers2 / 39:2;8 miles2) and would also involve,onshore and nearsho'e activities.

As proposed, NSF and PG&E would mobilize Ocrtober !15 :and: conduct the offshore survey b~tweenNqovember 1 and December 31, 201!2. Survey activities Would be conducted 24 hours per day and 7 daysper w~eek. As a result~of the on going consultation processes with National Marine Fisheries ServiCe underthe Marine. Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered. Species Act,: the project plan has beon revised toaccommodate their guidance that proposed activities occur over two years rather than one.

The Project is. being undertaiken due to public .concerns with operating a nuclear power plant in aseismically active area of California after the Fukushima Daiichi emergency. The seismic studies willprovide: additional insight concerning any reiationships or connections beOtween the. known faults a's well

as enhance knowledge of offshore faults near DcPP. PG&E will obtain as 'much seismic information aspossible, while minimizing, environmental impacts consistent w'ith the p~ermits and authorizations reqluiredby federal, state, and local :agencies. to conduct the .studies. The objectives of the proposed high energy3D seismic survey are:

,,Record highresolution wide 2D and 3D seismicoreflection profiles of major geologicstructures and fault zones :in the vicinity of DCPP;' Obtain imp?,ov~d deep.(>1 kmn. [>0,6 mii) imaging of the Hosgri and Shoreline fault.zones in the vicinity o'f the DCPP to constrain'fault geometry;

.D Obtain improved (>lkm [>0.6 mi] depth) imaging of the intersection of the Hosgri andShoreline fault z:ones near PointBuchon;

SObtain improved (>1 kcm [>0.6 mai])imaging of the intersection of the Sah Simeon andIHosgri fault zones near Point Estero; andAugment current regional seismic data base for suibsequent use. and analysis.

The project components :are su~mmarzed be low. Please refer to the attached project description foradditional information,.

For offshore activities, the Project proposes •to conduct 3D .seismic .surveys using a ;geophysical surveyvessel. The primary vessel for survey operations would be the R/V Marcus G. Langseth, which is ownedbY NSF. The RNV Lanigseth Woutld •toW a series of sound-generating air guns and sound-recordinghydrophonies along pre-.determined shore-parallel and Shore-pe~rpendietilar transects to conduct deep (10.to 15 :km [6 :to9 rai) seismic reflection profiling of major geologic structures and fault zones in the.vicinity of DCPP.- In addition to the R/VLangs eth, other~marine vessels would be uSed as-support Vesselsto monitor marine wildlife activity and prevent gear entanglement With any obstructions.

Nearshore activities would. include the placement of geophones along the ocean floor off the coast andadjacent to DCPP propetty. The geophones would be strung together by cables and plac.ed along fiveshore-perpendicular' transects. The .geophones would be Secured •to the ocean bottom with the use oeraclump Weight or similar device. NMFS has recommended the project be implemnented over a two yearperiod..As a result, approximately 12 geophones wouild be deployed in .201i2, and the majority of onshoreactivities and geophon~e deployment would occur, in 2013.

onshor'e activzities Would include ,the. use of seismic sound sources...Sound sources w~ould be geneiatedfrom-two types of seismic source.,vehicles: VibroseisTM and accelerated weight drop (AWD) trucks.Vibroseis•' and AWD trucks would only be operated on DCPP property along predetermined transectsthat follow existing toads, Vehicle-mounted sound sources Would b•e excluded from cultural resource.sites,. except where established roads :already pass through sites. Sound .sources within cultural siteswould be generated by hand-placing a metal Plate on~theground and striking it-with a sledge~hammer.

Onshore ,activties would also include the placement .of ge0phones (recording devices) along the .seismicsound source, corridors at.DCPP and wouild extend 'onto the adjacent Montana de Oro State.Park property.The geophones would be carried !by backpack• and secured to the ground surface using a five-inceh spikelocated at the bottom of the device¢. The Project Description .incorporates an .applicant proposed measure(APM 23) that provides .for cultural resource, moniitors to accompany'each field team dulring deploymentof survey equfipment aind seismic testing to .ensure resource protectioni.

The proposed APE, for this project includes :the offshore seismic survey, areas, the five nearshioregeophone .alignment~s adjacent to DCPp, the onshore s~und s0ources (VibroseisTM trucks, AWD trucks andsle~dgehammer) and receiver (geophone).routes, and existing paved areas withfin DCPP that.would be usedfor staginig (Figures 2 and 6- of Attachehnet' 2). No Site .preparation or ground distuirbance :(vegetation

removal, grading, etc.) for staging area~s would be required. Vibrso.seistM and AWD trucks would operateon existinig, :established •roads• on the DC•PP property. Ground ,dis•turbance within the..APE woulid •benieg.igible, iimited to .the placement of ~geophoees on the grundt surface ad fiv'e anchors (or' clumpweights) used secure the, fivie nearshore geophone: arrays rto. the. ocean, floor. The vertical APE wouldextend from the;ground surface to .a depth of five inches below the surfaceto accommodate the geophonespikes. Within the nearshore, marine, env~ironment,. the vertical AP•E •would extendi to a maximum of

inistallations or .facilities ae proposed as part f the. Project.

Native American outreach for the Diab~lo. CanyOn Seismic Ima~ging Project was- iniiated by :PG&E in-the

undertaken by California State Lanids Commins~sion (CSLC) wh~ile :preparin-g the Enveironmental Imp~actReport (EIR) for "the.. Project. 'Registered. letters were ,sent: by the •CSLC to tribal .represenitatives. onNovemlber 1:4, 2011.• *No responses were reeived as of the circulation of, the Final BIR in July 2012. The.NSF continued, consultation-puvsuant to the :requirements of Section 106 •in Juliy 2012, The' bSF: mailed

announcing •the public :hearing dateo and inviting "comments on, the ;NSF's ",Draft EnvironmentalAssessmenlt (Dr aft EA) of Marine Geophysical Sureys by thle K/V Marcus •G. Langseth for the Central

C~oatal Califorllia Se•ismic Imaging Project." During theo 45-day open p•ubliccomment •period of the-Draftl

Lead, Salinan Tribe of :Monterey and San LUis 'Obispo Counties and no coimmentswere made- by tribalrepresentatives duringithepublic hearing held: on August 8, 20:12. Follow-up. phone calls were made by..NSF•. to tribal representatives that commnite-d .during the C•SLC public :hearin'gs held on ,the Final EiR orthat proi-vded co~mment~s'on thie NSF Draft: Environmiental Assessment. On: August 20, 2012, NiSF• leftvoicemail messages for: '() Patty Dunton,, Tribal Administrator for John Burcb, TraditionaI Lead,, SalinanTribe of Monterey and San Luis Obispo ,Counties, as shte had provided written comments on the NSFDr~aftEA"; and, (2) Fred C•ollins, Triba A~dmilnistrator, NorthernChumash Tribal Council (NCTC), as •he"had proid0.•ied verbal comeif nts d~ur-ing !the C.sLC ubic[ heairings on tihe Final[ EIR. As NSF i•'d .not havedirect con~tact informationi for crystal Baker• ofthe •Coastal Band of the..Chumash NHationi, 'who commentedduring the CSLC public hearings on the Final EIR, on August 21, 2012, NSF contacted Vennise Miller, as.she was ident~ified :as the• Chairperson •for the Coasta Band •of the Chumash Nation• according to

wtith Ms.. Miller, .and :she :provided Crytail Baker with. our contact !informnation. Subsequienitly Crstal.Baker contacted NSF regarding the project. 'On August 27, :2012, NSF contacted Gabriel: Altamirano of.the Chumash tribe and discussed .the: project, as heI had Contacted via emnail one-of the, sctentists at

NSorther C:humash Tribe :(yak tit ,•* ti;t • yak t!.ihini) .and.An~tonette-Cordaero, Tribal Ch•air of the C.oastaBand .of .the Chumash Nation. NSF has conitinued"to haive commnictr[ations with Fred Collins, CrystaltBaker, and Gabriel ,Altamirano, and anticipates holding a meeting with these interested parties (Northern.Chumash Tribe,. CoastaliBand ,of the Chumash Nation,. and the Chumash N~atioi) via. teleconfierence .to:disc•uss tihe iproject fuirtheir andl any assoc:iated issues..'... ... . ............... ... . . .....

The enclosed inventory report (Attachment 2)' identifies '.54 historic~properties: (including 315• 8hipwrecksSand seven..other unevalua~ted. resou!rces that are.assumed, eligible to-the N•ational Register for management•p.urposes) •located within t•he APE. The 'resourceswere identified thirough-a combination of field survey,.

,of the onslhore-sites -re contributing elements of-the• Ranc'ho: Canada de los Ososy yPecho-y Islay NationalRegister Historic' District (listing 7500.047, eligible undrcr~iterion D),•

The ,inventory report includes an ,assessment of, effects from the proposed project on historic properties(and unevaluated resources). The analysis considers t~h findings of POSt`-activity archaeologicalmonitoring for a comiparable onshore Project at Diablo qanyon in 2011 which did n~ot result in anyimpacts to cultural resources. Based on the: lack of any ground disturbance with the potential tocompromise the iintegrity of r'esouirces, thie lack of permanent installations as well as the distance betweenthe identified shipwrecks and nearshore geophones, NSF has determined that the project will result in "!NoAdverse Effect" to the individual sites and the historic district within the APE.

In closinig, NSF requests your comments, on the appropriateness of the APE for the proposed Undertaking(p~ursuant to §800.4[a][l]) and the adequacy 6f~historic properly identification efforts (pursuant to§ 800.4[b]), as well as your concurrence with our finding Of''No Adverse Effect" (pursuant to

We look forw~ard to receiving your response and~reSpectfully request an expedited review of the enclosedconsultation package. Your response within two weeks of receipt wotild be greatly appreciated. If yourequ~ire any additional information, please don't hesitate to contact the undersigned.

Thank you for :considering this submittal.

Sincerely,

Holly :SmithEnvironmental COmpliance Officer

Attachments:1. Att~achm!ent 1:; Project Description2., Attachment 2: Cultural Resou~rce Inventory Report (Hewes, Haydu and Price 201!2)

APPENDIX EENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

Pacific Gas M. Trumbly Mailing Address

Cultural Resources Specialist 5555 Florin Perkins, Room 137and Environmental Services Sacramento, Ca 95826

ElectricTel: 916-386-5436 cell: 916-201 -8571

Company Email: [email protected]

February 27, 2008

Milford Wayne Donaldson, State Historic Preservation OfficerOffice of Historic PreservationCalifornia Department of Parks and Recreation1416 9th Street, Room 1442-7Sacramento, CA 95814


Dear Mr. Donaldson:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is conducting a License Renewal Feasibility Study todetermine if it is feasible to renewal the Diablo Canyon Power Plant operating licenses. As part of thelicense renewal process, NRC requires license applicants to "assess whether any historic orarchaeological properties will be affected by the proposed project." NRC may also request an informalconsultation with your office at a later date under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Actof 1966, as amended (16 USC 470), and Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations(36 CFR 800). By contacting you early in the application process, we hope to identify any issues thatneed to be addressed or any information your office may need to expedite the NRC consultation.


Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) is located within the PG&E owner-controlled area, which consistsof approximately 760 acres of land located in San Luis Obispo County, adjacent to the Pacific Oceanand roughly equidistant from San Francisco and Los Angeles. It is located directly southeast ofMontana de Oro State Park and is approximately 12 miles southwest of the city of San Luis Obispo, thecounty seat and the nearest significant population center (Figure 2.1). The DCPP is located on the PortSan Luis, Ca 7.5' USGS Quadrangle in the unsectioned area of Canada De Los Osos Y Pecho Y IslayLand Grant in Township 31 South, Range 10 East.

Three transmission lines connect the power plant to the regional grid, and are thus relevant to theLicense Renewal Feasibility Study (Figure 3.1-2). They include:

,, Diablo-Mesa - One double-circuit line was connected to an existing Morro Bay-Mesa line 10.25miles from DCPP with an 80-ft. right-of-way width.

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Page D-2.License Renewal Application


* Diablo-Gates - One single-circuit line was connected to the Gates Substation in Fresno County79 miles northeast of DCPP with a 350-ft. right-of-way width.

* Diablo Midway #2 and 3 - Two single-circuit lines were connected to the Midway Substation inKern County 84 miles southeast of DCPP with a combined right-of-way width of 400 ft.

In total, there are approximately 170 miles of corridor that occupy approximately 4,500 acres. Thecorridors pass primarily through foothills sand rolling land. In addition, there are parcels of land that areagricultural and forest land.

PG&E has completed a Technical Report documenting known cultural resources within 6 miles of theDCPP and 2.4 mile corridor around the Transmission Line (Attachment A). In order to compile thisinformation a data search was completed at the California Historical Resources Information System(CHRIS), an internal PG&E data search and using the National Register Information System on-linedatabase. This report also describes our current Cultural Resources Management Plan for CA-SLO-2, which islocated adjacent the DCPP facility.

PG&E does not expect continued DCPP operations to adversely affect cultural resources in the APE, asPG&E has no plans to alter current operations or disturb any land for the proposed project. Noconstruction along any of the transmission lines is planned. Maintenance on the transmission lineswould continue as currently performed.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this project please feel free to call me (916) 201-8571.After your review, we would appreciate your input detailing any concerns you may have about culturalresources in the current study area or confirming PG&E's conclusion that operation of DCPP over the licenserenewal term would have no effect on cultural resources. This will enable us to meet our application preparationschedule. PG&E will include a copy of this letter and your response in the Environmental Report that may besubmitted to the NRC as part of the DCPP license renewal application.


Best Regards,

Maggie TrumblyCultural Resource SpecialistEnclosure (Technical Report)

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Page D-3License Renewal Application


<•Urban Areas | ~Environmental Report~Diablo Canyon Power Plant

I ,Ji• Figure 2.1-2~50-Mile Vicinity Map

Diablo Canyon Power PlantLicense Renewal Application

Page D-4


SAN BERNARDINO

-----0OkV I=230kVI OE

a - ISM 7flO 1~O

Diablo Canyon Power Plant Page D-5License Renewal Application

STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. GovernorOFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATIONDEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION1725 2 3rd Street, Suite 100SACRAMENTO, CA 95816-7100(916) 445-7000 Fax: (916) [email protected]

October 29, 2012 Reply in Reference To: NSF_2012_0919_001

Holly SmithEnvironmental Compliance OfficerNational Science Foundation4201 Wilson BoulevardArlington, Virginia 22230

Re: Central Coastal California Seismic Imaging Project

Dear Ms. Smith:

Thank you for seeking my consultation regarding the above noted undertaking.Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800 (as amended 8-05-04) regulations implementing Section106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NI--PA), the National Science Foundation(NSF) is seeking my comments on the effects the proposed undertaking will have onhistoric properties ...

The project consists of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) conducting seismic imagingstudies in the vicinity of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, both onshore and offshore.The offshore activities include the operation• of an NSF research vessel. The vesselwould place geophones along the ocean floor adjacent to the power plant. Geophoneswould be secured to the ocean bottom with the use of a clump weight. The researchvessel would also tow a series of sound generating air guns and hydrophones alongseveral transects to record seismic reflection data.

Onshore activities will include the use of Vibroseis and accelerated weight drop truckson existing paved, gravel and dirt roads. The Vibroseis and accelerated weight droptrucks will not be used within the boundaries of archaeological sites along the dirt orgravel roads. Geophones will be placed along the seismic sound source corridors andonto the adjacent State Park sand spit.

The Area of Potential Effects includes the linear alignments of on shore geophones andseismic transects, as well as the offshore placements of geophones. The vertical APEfor effects from geophone placement extends up to five inches deep onshore and up toone foot deep for offshore geophones. The vertical APE for vibrational effects from theVibroseis technology on archaeological sites is currently poorly understood; however,PG&E has previously documented that no visible effects to stratigraphy occur 20meters away from the Vibroseis implementation point. In addition to your letter receivedSeptember 19, 2012, and email amendment to the project description received October24, 2012, you have provided the following documents as evidence of your efforts toidentify historic properties in the APE:"

* Cultural Resources Inventory for the Central California Coastal Seismic ImagingProject (Savannah Hewes et al., Applied EarthWorks, September 2012)

29 October 2012 NSF_2012_0919_001Page 2 of 2

* Memorandum: Assessment of Impacts for Geoseismic Operations PG&E CentralCoastal California Seismic Imaging Project (Damon Haydu, Applied Earth Works,October 2012)

PG&E, on behalf of NSF, has searched their internal cultural resource records, as theAPE is almost entirely on PG&E property, in addition to searching the records at theCentral Coastal Information Center. As a result of the records search, and previoussurvey and monitoring work in the past two years, PG&E has identified 39 culturalresources within the onshore APE, and 15 known shipwrecks within the APE foroffshore activities.

The precise locations of the 15 identified shipwrecks are unknown, and as such theplacement of the sea-floor mounted geophones will be directed by divers, ensuring thatthe geophones are places on seafloor and not within shipwrecks or other, obvioussubmerged cultural resources.

PG&E will avoid working within 10 meters of the 28 archaeological sites bisected byunpaved roads. One of the remaining 11 archaeological sites is not within the plannedsourcing transect, and as such will be avoided by the undertaking completely. The tenremaining archaeological sites which are bisected by the highly developed paved roadwill not likely be affected due to the severe cuts and layers of fill upon which the pavedroad is constructed. The roads crossing all sites will still be used for access to furtherportions of the sourcing transects.

Geophones will be placed within the boundaries of sites by crews accessing sites eitherby foot, or with vehicles on existing roads. The NSF and PG&E have committed tohaving qualified archaeological monitors present during onshore geophone placementand during sourcing transects to direct and implement the avoidance scheme describedabove.

Based on the NSF and PG&E's identification efforts and avoidance plan, pursuant to 36CFR 800.5(c)(1), I concur with the NSF finding of No Adverse Effects to historicproperties.

Be advised that under certain circumstances, such as unanticipated discovery or achange in project description, the NSF may have additional future responsibilities forthis undertaking under 36 CFR Part 800. Thank you for seeking my comments andconsidering historic properties as part of your project planning. If you have anyquestions or concerns, please contact Trevor Pratt of my staff at (916) 445-7017 or atemail at tpratt(•.parks.ca.pov.

Sincerely,

Carol Roland-Nawi, PhDState Historic Preservation Officer

STATE OF CALIFORNIA- THE RESOURCES AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, G'overnorOFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATIONDEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATIONP.O. BOX 942896SACRAMENTO, CA 94296-0001(916) 653-6624 Fax: (916) [email protected]•www.o hp.parks.ca.g ov

March 18, 2009

Reply in Reference To: NRC090303A

Maggie TrumblyCultural Resource SpecialistPacific Gas and Electric5555 Florin Perkins, Room 137Sacramento, CA 95826

Re: Section 106 Consultation for License Renewal Feasibility Study for Diablo CanyonPower Plant Operating Licenses

Dear Ms. Trumbly,

Thank you for initiating consultation regarding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's(FERC) efforts to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966(16 U.S.C. 4700), as amended, and its implementing regulation found at 36 CFR Part 800.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is conducting a License Renewal Feasibility Study todetermine if it is feasible to renew the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) operatinglicense. As part of the license renewal process, the NRC requires license applicants to"assess whether any historic or archaeological resources will be affected by theproposed project." Furthermore, PG&E does not expect continued operations toadversely affect cultural resources in the APE, nor does it expect to alter currentoperations, either through planned construction or ground disturbance. Maintenance onthe transmission lines is expected to continue as currently performed. The decision topursue license renewal has not been made.

You have requested that I comment on concerns or questions I may have regardingcultural resources located within the study area and that I assess your conclusion thatoperation of the DCPP over the license renewal term will not affect cultural resources.

To support these findings, you have submitted maps, a technical report, historicaldocumentation and cultural resource records for a study area consisting of threetransmission lines encompassing approximately 170 miles of corridor occupyingapproximately 4500 acres: Based on the information provided, I have the followingcomment:

1) Relicensing will require the development of a Programmatic Agreement and aHistoric Properties Management Plan in consultation with this office.

18 March 2009 NRC090303APage 2 of 2

Thank you for seeking my comments and considering historic properties as part of yourproject planning. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Ed Carroll ofmy staff at (916) 653-9010 or at email at ecarrollt~ca.1parks.gov.

Sincerely,

Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAJAState Historic Preservation Officer

Documents

Cultural Resource Specialist · Services Sacramento, Ca 95826 ElectricTel: 916-386-5436 cell: 916-201-8571 CompanyEmail: [email protected] July 15, 2008 Larry Meyers, Executive Secretary